how key personnel gaps could cost major defense contracts.

You’ve seen it before. Your capture team crafts a strong technical proposal with proven past performance, trusted partners and a compliant price. But the key personnel section tells a different story. Across defense procurement markets, evaluators are placing greater weight on the availability and readiness of key personnel; an area where even well-qualified teams can lose ground.

A “To Be Hired” placeholder where a program manager or systems architect’s name should be can undo months of preparation. For contracting officers, it’s a red flag that signals potential delivery risk from day one. In today’s defense procurement environment, key personnel gaps are direct obstacles to winning. Agencies view them as indicators of high-performance risk and in best-value evaluations, risk often outweighs technical merit.

why resumes matter to evaluators

When the government evaluates proposals, it looks beyond capabilities on paper. It wants proof that the people proposed can execute the project; that the talent is really qualified and available.

For example, the Commerce Acquisition Regulation on proposal preparation is very specific. For example, it requires bidders to provide:

• The names, titles and duties of proposed key individuals
• A resume detailing education, experience and accomplishments
• The percentage of time each person will dedicate to the project
• A clear justification of qualifications for each role

A “TBD” entry fails every one of these mandatory criteria. From a government perspective, named personnel reduce risk and demonstrate real capability. They show you understand what it takes to perform not just in theory but in practice. A proposal without real names and resumes is incomplete and noncompliant.

That’s why experienced contracting officers often tell an undeniable truth: resumes win bids.

the ultimate cost of litigation and termination risk

Beyond lost bids, proposing unconfirmed personnel can also expose contractors to compliance risks. In the U.S., for example, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protest decision made it clear that failing to provide letters of commitment for proposed personnel is grounds for an award to be overturned.

In European defence procurement, while the legal precedents differ, contracting authorities under Directive 2009/81/EC still require proof of technical and professional capacity. They may also request documentation to verify personnel qualifications and availability.

These precedents underscore a simple message: proposing unavailable personnel doesn’t just weaken a bid, it can jeopardize your organization’s standing in future competitions. For defense contractors where each award can span years and billions in potential revenue, the stakes couldn’t be higher.

the contractor’s dilemma: the catch-22

Every capture leader knows the challenge. You can’t justify hiring expensive cleared engineers until you’ve won the contract but you can’t win the contract without showing you have them.

This “Catch-22” is particularly tough in the defense industry context. Projects often require niche expertise and active security clearance that takes months to obtain. Recruiting these specialists before an award is financially risky, yet proposing empty slots almost guarantees a loss.

The result is a cycle where proposal teams scramble to fill roles at the last minute, often relying on contingent commitments from candidates who may already have competing offers. Even when done with the best intentions, this reactive approach leaves room for errors or unverified assumptions about availability.

the market reality: driving the catch-22

The scarcity of cleared and specialized talent isn’t just a temporary issue; it's structural.

According to a global defense staffing analysis by PwC, organizations face three intertwined challenges: attracting and retaining talent, rapidly building new capabilities and adapting to an evolving workforce.

Defense programs depend on deep specialists in areas like systems integration, software engineering and cybersecurity. These experts are highly sought after in commercial sectors where flexible work arrangements and higher pay are common.

As PwC notes, the defense sector’s value proposition has “not changed quickly enough” to meet new workforce expectations. This talent gap is compounded by lengthy vetting processes and security clearance requirements, making it harder for qualified candidates to enter or re-enter cleared jobs even when willing.

The result is a bidding environment where capability isn’t defined solely by technology but by who you can credibly name in your proposal. Strong defense staffing has become one of the most critical differentiators for organizations seeking long-term success in defense jobs & careers.

the solution

There’s only one sustainable way to break the cycle and address the risks tied to key personnel gaps: proactively building a contingent-ready bench of talent.

Instead of waiting for an RFP, leading contractors invest in pre-award workforce strategies that prioritize cleared jobs and defense staffing readiness. This involves developing a pool of pre-vetted resumes aligned with common key personnel categories. These are professionals already assessed, interested and ready to commit contingent upon the award.

With this foundation, your proposal teams can attach letters of commitment with confidence, satisfying compliance requirements and showing evaluators that your team is ready to perform immediately.

The impact goes beyond compliance. It transforms your proposal narrative from “we can find these people” to “they’re already on our team.” That shift builds trust with contracting officers and positions your organization as a lower-risk partner—a crucial differentiator in competitive evaluations.

how a partner for talent changes the equation

Building and maintaining a contingent bench is a strategic investment. It requires specialized recruiting capacity, deep clearance expertise and sustained relationships with technical professionals across critical domains.

This is where Randstad’s approach makes a difference.

Instead of treating staffing as a last-minute proposal step, forward-looking defense contractors collaborate with workforce partners who anticipate their needs, manage pipelines of cleared talent and ensure that compliance documentation is ready before the RFP arrives.

This model aligns capture, HR and operations, ensuring that by submission time, every key personnel role is filled with qualified, committed and contract-ready professionals. The result is a proposal that inspires confidence and signals to evaluators that your team can perform from day one.

readiness wins contracts

In today’s defense environment, the deciding factor often isn’t innovation or costing; it’s readiness.

Readiness to perform. Readiness to comply. Readiness to deliver on day one.

For today’s defense contractors, that confidence begins long before the RFP, with the people whose names appear under “key personnel.”